首页> 外文期刊>Conservation Biology >Mechanisms and impacts of an incentive-based conservation program with evidence from a randomized control trial
【24h】

Mechanisms and impacts of an incentive-based conservation program with evidence from a randomized control trial

机译:基于激励的保护计划的机制与影响来自随机控制试验的证据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Conservation science needs more high-quality impact evaluations, especially ones that explore mechanisms of success or failure. Randomized control trials (RCTs) provide particularly robust evidence of the effectiveness of interventions (although they have been criticized as reductionist and unable to provide insights into mechanisms), but there have been few such experiments investigating conservation at the landscape scale. We explored the impact of Watershared, an incentive-based conservation program in the Bolivian Andes, with one of the few RCTs of landscape-scale conservation in existence. There is strong interest in such incentive-based conservation approaches as some argue they can avoid negative social impacts sometimes associated with protected areas. We focused on social and environmental outcomes based on responses from a household survey in 129 communities randomly allocated to control or treatment (conducted both at the baseline in 2010 and repeated in 2015-2016). We controlled for incomplete program uptake by combining standard RCT analysis with matching methods and investigated mechanisms by exploring intermediate and ultimate outcomes according to the underlying theory of change. Previous analyses, focused on single biophysical outcomes, showed that over its first 5 years Watershared did not slow deforestation or improve water quality at the landscape scale. We found that Watershared influenced some outcomes measured using the survey, but the effects were complex, and some were unexpected. We thus demonstrated how RCTs can provide insights into the pathways of impact, as well as whether an intervention has impact. This paper, one of the first registered reports in conservation science, demonstrates how preregistration can help make complex research designs more transparent, avoid cherry picking, and reduce publication bias.
机译:保护科学需要更高质量的影响评估,特别是探索成功或失败机制的影响。随机控制试验(RCT)提供干预措施有效性的特殊稳健证据(尽管他们被批评为还原剂,但无法向机制提供见解),但是尚未在景观量表中调查保护等实验。我们探讨了玻利维亚州和玻利维亚和玻利维亚州的激励保护计划的影响,其中少数景观规模守恒的一个RCT之一。对这种激励的保护方法有很强的兴趣,因为有些人认为可以避免有时与受保护区域相关的负面社会影响。我们专注于基于在随机分配控制或治疗的129个社区的家庭调查的答复的社会和环境成果(2010年2010年的基线在基线进行并在2015 - 2016年重复)。通过将标准的RCT分析与匹配方法和调查机制相结合来控制不完全的计划摄取,通过根据潜在的变革理论探索中级和最终结果。以前的分析,专注于单一生物物理结果,表明,在其前5年的流域上,流域并没有缓慢砍伐砍伐或改善景观量表的水质。我们发现流域影响了使用调查测量的一些结果,但效果很复杂,有些效果是出乎意料的。因此,我们证明了RCT如何为影响的途径提供洞察力,以及干预是否有影响。本文是第一份在保护科学中的注册报告之一,演示了预转移如何有助于使复杂的研究设计更加透明,避免樱桃采摘,减少出版物偏见。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号